Forget The President, What About The Marijuana?

[dUSt]

[i]2291 The use of drugs inflicts very grave damage on human health and life. Their use, except on strictly therapeutic grounds, is a grave offense. [/i][list]
[*]How are "drugs" being defined here. Illegal drugs? Legal drugs?
[*]Does it only apply to drugs that "inflict very grave damage on human health and life"?
[*]What if someone smoked legal marijuana for anxiety relief, similar to how people take Zoloft?
[*]What if someone simply smoked legal marijuana to relax at the end of a hard day? Is that therapeutic or recreational?
[/list]
Is it reasonable to conclude that if it is found that marijuana does not inflict very grave damage to health and life, then this catechism reference does not actually apply to it?

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='dUSt' timestamp='1352359618' post='2506459']
[i]2291 The use of drugs inflicts very grave damage on human health and life. Their use, except on strictly therapeutic grounds, is a grave offense. [/i][list]
[*]How are "drugs" being defined here. Illegal drugs? Legal drugs?
[*]Does it only apply to drugs that "inflict very grave damage on human health and life"?
[*]What if someone smoked legal marijuana for anxiety relief, similar to how people take Zoloft?
[*]What if someone simply smoked legal marijuana to relax at the end of a hard day? Is that therapeutic or recreational?
[/list]
Is it reasonable to conclude that if it is found that marijuana does not inflict very grave damage to health and life, then this catechism reference does not actually apply to it?
[/quote]
I do not think so, because in the curial document entitled "Church: Drugs and Drug Addiction," the deleterious health effects of marijuana usage are not the only reason for the Church's condemnation of the use of cannabis. In fact, the sinfulness of the drug is related more to its mind altering and addictive properties, and more so to the former than the latter.

According to Catholic teaching, cannabis - like any other drug - may legitimately be used only for therapeutic reasons.

[Jesus_lol]

[quote name='HisChildForever' timestamp='1352356679' post='2506441']
I don't understand the fuss over marijuana. You can relax your mind and body without it. Meditation, massage, relaxation techniques. Hell, you can have a good time and enjoy a social gathering without it.
[/quote]

Same applies to alcohol, on the other hand.

[quote name='Apotheoun' timestamp='1352366316' post='2506472']
I do not think so, because in the curial document entitled "Church: Drugs and Drug Addiction," the deleterious health effects of marijuana usage are not the only reason for the Church's condemnation of the use of cannabis. In fact, the sinfulness of the drug is related more to its mind altering and addictive properties, and more so to the former than the latter.

According to Catholic teaching, cannabis - like any other drug - may legitimately be used only for therapeutic reasons.
[/quote]

Marijuana is not considered to be addictive.

[Guest]

[quote name='Norseman82' timestamp='1352355891' post='2506436']


"Shamone"? Did you mean "shalom"? Maybe therapeutic medicine is not a good idea for you...
[/quote] haha no I just can't spell...always sucked at it...I did mean shalom though...thank you...lol

[Guest]

what about the mind altering and addictive properties of alcohol ?

Edited November 8, 2012 by Guest

[Guest]

Being someone who has struggled big time with alcohol I can say without a doubt alcohol is way more addictive then marijuana...I would say if anything marijuana can become a habbit...but I've felt the strong power of the addiction of alcohol and its something I still struggle with....and I've also dealt with the mind alterting that alcohol does...give me around 6 or 7 beers and the world is a very different place...

Edited November 8, 2012 by Guest

[Cherie]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' timestamp='1352367996' post='2506473']


Marijuana is not considered to be addictive.
[/quote]

Yes, it is: http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/marijuana-abuse/marijuana-addictive

You may consider that site biased, but I can find a whole lot of other, "less-biased" studies if you want.

[dUSt]

[quote name='Apotheoun' timestamp='1352366316' post='2506472']
I do not think so, because in the curial document entitled "Church: Drugs and Drug Addiction," the deleterious health effects of marijuana usage are not the only reason for the Church's condemnation of the use of cannabis.
[/quote]
Do you know if this document is available online? All I could find was the preface: [url="http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/hlthwork/documents/rc_pc_hlthwork_doc_20011101_chiesa-droga-presentation_en.html"]http://www.vatican.v...ntation_en.html[/url]

I did notice it was a document that comes from the "Pontifical Council for Health Pastoral Care" and not directly from the pope or a bishop.

I also found it interesting that in the preface it says, [i]"With this manual, we do not pretend to offer a definitive answer but to give some suggestions that could be of help in pastoral work."[/i]

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='dUSt' timestamp='1352391814' post='2506566']
Do you know if this document is available online? All I could find was the preface: [url="http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/hlthwork/documents/rc_pc_hlthwork_doc_20011101_chiesa-droga-presentation_en.html"]http://www.vatican.v...ntation_en.html[/url][/quote]
No, I do not think it is online (other than the outline on the Vatican website). I purchased it years ago from a book company in Italy.

[quote name='dUSt' timestamp='1352391814' post='2506566']I did notice it was a document that comes from the "Pontifical Council for Health Pastoral Care" and not directly from the pope or a bishop.[/quote]
The document, like all curial documents, participates in the Ordinary Magisterium of the Pope and so it represents his teaching (and official Church teaching in general) on the issues discussed. It also quotes, and refers throughout the text, to Pope John Paul's homilies, speeches, and writings, along with what has been stated by other important ecclesiastical officials (e.g., Cardinal Ratzinger, Cardinal Sodano, et al.), while also referring to other curial and papal documents (e.g., Veritatis Splendor on moral issues). It is clearly intended to be, at least based upon the text, the Church's official position on issues related to drug abuse and drug trafficking.

[quote name='dUSt' timestamp='1352391814' post='2506566']I also found it interesting that in the preface it says, [i]"With this manual, we do not pretend to offer a definitive answer but to give some suggestions that could be of help in pastoral work."[/i][/quote]
When read in context that is referring to the causes and the health concerns related to drug addiction, and to its treatment. After all, no document can give a definitive answer to those questions, nor even can scientific studies do that, because we do not know the definitive impact of drug use on the body or mind, but can only determine what happens by looking at particular subjects, nor can we rule out the possibility of new treatments for drug addiction in the future. As far as the moral principles laid out in the document are concerned, they are completely consistent with the Church's tradition in moral theology, and to change them would require a change in the Church's faith, and I do not know about you, but I do not believe that is ever going to happen.

Edited November 8, 2012 by Apotheoun

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='Norseman82' timestamp='1352338527' post='2506252']
Actually, the catechism does in fact state that abuse of tobacco is a sin.


[/quote]
I never felt it sinful to smoke. I felt it was more of a harmful affliction. In some circles it's considered a disease. I felt I was being pwned by the devil via the Marlboro man and those 15 doctors that said smoking was manly and perfectly safe. But thankfully I was able to eventually break free and now have trouble getting consultations with doctors because 15 of them are dead. I have no expertise on Marijuana, I have never used. But observing how users tended to be moody at best and odd, anti social and disfunctional at worst. I considered it as at least as dangerous as Anti depressants and they are much more dangerous than drug [s]cartels[/s] companies try to let you believe. There are numerous suicides and psychotic incidents that were attributed to the persons illness when in fact there is evidence that mind altering drugs were the real cause by sudden imbalance in brain chemistry. As for alcohol someone mentioned its evil and it certainly is the biggest cause of misery that there is but as we know from Cana moderate use is not frowned on. The answer seems to be a mystery.

[quote]Also, when was the last time you heard of someone getting the munchies after smoking a cigarette or pipe or cigar?[/quote]
It certainly does supress appetite. But I wouldn't recomend it as a dietry aid. I gained bulk weight when I gave up, but never was about to consider returning to the lung damage that I was aquiring. 30 years later I'm still over weight no heart problems or diabetes. So I think my choice was the right one. I'm pretty sure I would be dead or on a ventilator if I had persisted.

Edited November 8, 2012 by Mark of the Cross

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' timestamp='1352367996' post='2506473']
Marijuana is not considered to be addictive.
[/quote]
Lol J. Everyone is different and react to any drug differently. Some become addicted, some don't. Applies to any drug! All drug use is experimental no matter how many tests are done. My experience of the SSRI Paxil was completely contradictory to text book. And so Unregulated drug use, that is, drugs that are of unknown purity and quality is highly dangerous. also they said and still claim that SSRI's are not addictive they insist that the hell that breaks loose is discontinuation syndrome

Edited November 8, 2012 by Mark of the Cross

[KnightofChrist]

A to the P to the O! APO!

[Ice_nine]

I think that there's a lot of fear among religious folk because the drug is typically associated with a counter-culture that is atheistic/rebellious or new age and/or a number of other unsavory things. It's going to take a lot of years to undo that perception because its so well-ingrained that apparently people cannot approach the debate without being reasonable.

[zabbazooey]

Personally speaking, and knowing several people who 'partake' - it is not addictive. Easy to put down and walk away.

Some people may be psychologically addicted - feeling they can't sleep without it or need to be high every day, but physically addictive? Nope.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Ice_nine' timestamp='1352417607' post='2506733']
I think that there's a lot of fear among religious folk because the drug is typically associated with a counter-culture that is atheistic/rebellious or new age and/or a number of other unsavory things. It's going to take a lot of years to undo that perception because its so well-ingrained that apparently people cannot approach the debate without being reasonable.
[/quote]

The problem the Church has with drugs being abused or use for fun, marijuana too, is how they alter the mind, amongst other harmful effects. That is unlikely to change, so the Church is unlikely to changeher disapproval into approval.

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='Ice_nine' timestamp='1352417607' post='2506733']
I think that there's a lot of fear among religious folk because the drug is typically associated with a counter-culture that is atheistic/rebellious or new age and/or a number of other unsavory things. It's going to take a lot of years to undo that perception because its so well-ingrained that apparently people cannot approach the debate without being reasonable.
[/quote]
Personally I've had too much experience with prescription medications to consider uncontrolled substances anything other than highly dangerous. If the medical profession is so ignorant of the drugs they prescribe pushed by drug companies. What trust can be put in anyones assurance that unregulated ones are safe? But like an extreme sport you may consider the buzz worth the risk. That's up to you. But don't kid yourself that it's safe. Personally there were many good experiences from my use of Paxil and knowing what I know now I'm not sure I wouldn't have still used it. But I'm not going to play down the risks involved just to try to justify that.

[zabbazooey]

I just think it's crazy that doctors are prescribing Adderall, Ritalin, Xanax, painkillers like candy. But marijuana, a freaking PLANT grown out of the ground, that has no way of killing you (as a primary cause, such as overdose), and in most cases no addictive properties, is ILLEGAL.

But by all means let's all go to the liquor store and get some booze!

[Ice_nine]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1352417981' post='2506735']
The problem the Church has with drugs being abused or use for fun, marijuana too, is how they alter the mind, amongst other harmful effects. That is unlikely to change, so the Church is unlikely to changeher disapproval into approval.
[/quote]


There are a lot of things that "alter the mind," and so that vague label isn't really at all helpful. Caffeine is a psychoactive substance, it quite literally alters your mind (increased concentration among other qualities ) but are these effects too minor or just more acceptable "alterations" than the the effect of other drugs (minus the beloved alcohol and nicotine)? I mean, smoking a joint does not make you see unicorns or devils. If it does, there's probably something else in there or you might be precipitating schizophrenia.

I don't think people of your persuasion actually know what marijuana does in terms of its mind-alteration (with the exception of anomaly). Sure some people may get a little hippie-dippy and like use it to divine energies and "poo", but for me and many, many others (the drug is becoming more mainstream now) who use it the "mind alteration" isn't as scary or radical. It can induce a euphoric state (is that sinful?), it can decrease short-term memory WHILE you're under the influence (sinful?), it can augment your senses (sinful?), make you sleepy (sinful?) . . .

so I'm asking. You say "how they alter the mind" is the crux of the issue but that's just a catch-all phrase that is useless to me. Let's get into the specifics and talk real talk.

Edited November 9, 2012 by Ice_nine

[MIKolbe]

these ain't no church documents...

but it seems like the Popes have messed up the rotation...[color=#000000][font=Verdana][size=2]


[/size][/font][/color]
[quote]

[color=#000000][font=Verdana][size=2]

[b] The Popes hate dope[/b]
[/size][/font][/color][color=#000000][font=Verdana][size=2]

[color=#444444][size=4][i]
Since its foundation, the Catholic Church and its Pope have been the sworn enemy of global marijuana culture.[/i][/size][/color]
[size=3]While millions of Catholic faithful around the world mourn the passing of Pope John Paul II, pot people would do well to remember that the Catholic Church has long been a leader in the global effort to exterminate marijuana and the cannabis culture.[/size]

[size=3]The late Pope John Paul II had frequently campaigned against marijuana decriminalization, saying there are no distinctions between "hard" and "soft" drugs and that using marijuana is equivalent to using heroin.[/size][/size][/font][/color]

[/quote]

This articles comes from a (shall we say) publication that really likes water pipes, but not just for plumbing.

I really don't feel comfortable posting the link here.

(granted, alot of the article is very, ummm, animated and creative about the role of the church and marijuana through the ages)

But even if they get all these other facts wrong...and tremendously wrong; would they really be so stupid to think the Church approves or is ambiguous about marijuana use? Wouldn't it be in their interests to find the Church as an ally if there was any possibility (regardless how slight) that the Church taught anything except seeing marijuana use as morally bad?

I am not arguing if it's addictive, bad for you, alters your mindset, or any of that... it just seems the Church steps flat-footed here, with little, if any ambiguity...

which pretty much smells of very rotten elderberries for everyone...

but it is what it is...

[Anomaly]

Catholics always can justify just about anything. Just disagree based on your personal interpretation, note the Chirch did not speak infallibly, and wa-la, your conscience is golden. Pro pot, anti pot. Etc. etc. just as long as you don't masterbate or eat beef on Fridays.